But if someone is buying a gun at a gun show, they are probably law abiding citizen, I know of no murders in recent history where someone bought a gun at a gun show just to murder people.
Well, my response to this is pretty simple, Columbine. Those boys bought their guns at a gun show, with fake ID's. Also, I can promise you, gun show vendor do not have do a formal background check on anyone who buys a weapon from them, while at the gun show. That's why it's referred to as the 'gun show loophole'.
In regards to the Federal Government's responsibility in enforcing current law, you are absolutely right!! The trouble, is that's the job of the ATF, to track weapon's sales, and ensure current laws are enforced. Yet, it's been impossible to confirm anyone to that post, and huge restrictions have been put on what power they do have. What's the point in having laws that can't be enforced properly?
My question to you would be, why did you not ask the seller of the gun why no background check. I am sure he would have had all the answers, all we can do is second guess him.
Actually that's not true, Robyn Anderson bought the majority of their weapons for them, the other 9mm was bought from a pizza guy illegally as well.
I did actually, and he said that he was not required to anymore, as long the purchaser provided the correct answers to his question. Some sellers at gun shows totally do full background checks, but there is not a single requirement by law to do so. I've all for having guns! There are six in my house right now. I just think that if you are going to write a law that says no felon can have a gun, he shouldn't be able to go buy one with a fake ID and a few rehearsed answers. You are right that it was Robyn, but according to the Violence Policy Center, they were bought at the The Tanner Gun Show i 1998, buy unlicensed sellers. Also, the pizza guy, Mark Manes, sold them the pistols knowing they were underage, and there for illegal. It's a problem that this can happen, and there is no one to enforce the laws we supposedly have against these types of sales. Oh, I'm not a "Dim", nor am I a Democrat or a Republican. I'm an Independent, and don't make decisions based on political party affiliation. Just wanted that state for the record.
Either way they committed an illegal act to get the guns. Now what makes someone suppose that a new regulation would make those willing to break the law suddenly decide that they would not violate the new law.
I get your point here, but that's not the point I was attempting to make (though it's totally possible you weren't referring to me, and I'm just being self centered ). I don't think new regulations will stop illegal gun sales. However, confirming a head of the ATF and providing them enforceable rules. The ATF has been gutted in the last decade, and local law enforcement have been left to pick up the slack, as well as cleaning up the mess left in it's wake. With all of the budget cuts to law enforcement, it doesn't seem like the most intelligent use of resources. And both the Democrats and Republicans are to blame for this mess!! I'm not blaming one over the other for the past, I'm just debating existing law, and how we look to enforce them moving forward.
Murder is illegal no matter what, yet not one law on the books can stop it from happening.If say, we were to eliminate all guns, every last one of them in the country, the amount of murders would most likely increase due to the lack of personal defense.Then there is the issue of someone wanting to kill a couple of people, but since he can't harm the two without being overtaken, he builds a bomb and takes out ten times the amount.Point is, there is no law that will stop an individual, or group from doing what they set out to accomplish, all that will happen is people will lose the ability to stop these perpetrators from following through.Oh and welcome to the forum EH.
So, am I understanding correctly that since we can't stop all perpetrators, we shouldn't look at practical ways of reducing the availability of illegal weapons, to people who have lost the right to own them? I am in no way advocating revoking all weapons! I'm just saying what's the point of having laws that restrict gun ownership to felons, when there is no effective structure to enforce those laws?
The laws are already on the books, yet they still get them.For more than 200 years everyone could buy and sell weapons, yet suddenly there is a push to make it harder to purchase weapons, harder for the law abiding citizen.The GOP was in favor of instant background check, yet the left stopped it, ask yourself why?The answer is, they are using the issue as club to beat the Pubs into submission over the issue, an issue the could care less about.If you check the stats, you will find that medical malpractice/ is one of the leading causes of death in this country, guns a distant 10th.Maybe we should be cracking down on irresponsible doctors first?Point is, guns make headlines, car accidents and doctors screw ups don't.
Fair enough point about the other serious issues facing Americans. However, what is the point of laws, if we can't enforce them, regarding any issue? Of course existing laws haven't made a difference, no one is making sure the rules get followed. There are plenty of problems the federal government needs to be addressing. This happens to be the one the country is focused on right now. If the GOP was in favor of instant background checks, why is the junior senator from Texas going on to Meet The Press and claiming that gun show vendors already do background checks, and the "gun show loophole" is over blown? Why would the GOP have proposed instant background checks if there wasn't a need for them in the first place?